the critical mass of synaptic critique.

i mean, i really just wanted to write that heading, which i freely admit is Utterly over the top. which should surprise absolutely no one.

saw "tunnel" on thursday and "american standard" on friday, and i have to say that, as with books, there is a point when you've seen a fair amount of theatre when you begin to understand it beyond a general critique of its quality. that is, i'm finally starting to understand more about what I personally like in theatre, beyond evaluating its quality as a piece of work. which is really cool. i guess this is what curators and art directors access, when determining bodies of work to be shown congruently.
there's a whole lot of good work out there (and a whole lot of crap) but the significance in talking about it with anyone is being able to differentiate between your personal evaluation and an objective one. this is of course the age of GLUT, in all arenas, information, capitalist excess, and also, dare i say it, good ideas. good curating is like good management of information. so it doesn't get lost in irrelevance or on people whose tastes lie elsewhere.

can i just say i'm a huge fan of physical theatre. HUGE. in this case i'm talking about the bluemouth show. sweet jesus it was pretty incredible. and the...how do i not give it away...picture frame with mylar? YOW.

tho' i'm also a fan of storytelling. both of the above were too abstract for me in places. (shrug) i like stories. i'm pretty linear (which is completely bizarre, given my digressive nature, but true, nonetheless) i think it's 'coz i don't process info as well aurally as i do when i read it. so i'm a bit dim when things jump all over the map. i would like to read "american standard" on paper. i was thinking that as i was watching it, and then realized, in a small fit of melancholy, how much great theatre must get lost after the production is over precisely 'coz it's too small a venture to ever get published.

no wonder theatre schools are addicted to studying classical theatre. that's the only significant pile of paper they have to work from. i also wonder if the addiction to studying classical theatre isn't a way to keep even the creative sorts in tow. Let's face it, shakespeare isn't as incendiary as either suicide site or american standard is. not in this day and age. but how do you teach people to revolt? the first thing on most agendas is to teach people to appreciate. which, when i read it like that, seems a noble undertaking...

for an objective moment, may i say the acting in both of the above shows was Phenomenal, as were the production values, and i have reached the end of this week with a whole lot of that all too familiar awe of what people manage to put together with Love and a shoe-string budget. awesome.